Psychology meets philosophy with a cynical twist. What makes humans tick? Deep dives into consciousness, character psychology, and human nature through cartoons and sharp analysis.
Beyond the DNA Hype: Unveiling the Complexities of Celtic Ancestry
5 to 7 min read
Years ago, a friendly man with the surname Maxwell noted that we shared similar YDNA on Y-Seq, a genetic testing company. We both held an interest in each others family history. My paper trail reached its limit and strongly points toward involvement in the Welsh Wars: generations of my 'Page' forefathers seemed to serve the noble families therein.
Through the Norman era Baron Corbet and some of his men showed up in records near the location of Clan Maxwell in Dumfries, Scotland, bordering England. This Norman actually died in Roxburgh near Kelso; the Corbet family occupied both the Scottish and Welsh borders. My ancestral grandfather, William Page, lived along the Welsh borders on Thomas Corbets land in the 1240s-1250s in a place called Aston Rogers.
Out of the blue, during one of my less common explorations of Family Tree DNA, an alert reminded me again, confirming my genetic match of Z16502 shared between myself and 'The Clan Maxwell,' as the site put it. With numerous Scottish and Irish surnames in my matches, sharing subclades on the Scottish cluster and being of the Western Atlantic Modal type: a picture easily started to form in my head. This is where people begin to invest money into DNA, and to be honest, I did.
I wanted to know where to understand the original where-abouts of my forefathers, and, as you'd expect, from which tribe or culture they belonged. The cost can be anything from £20 to £500, depending on the service you have. I spent conservatively on my tests and was finally given my answer, which was: BY113677 a subclade of R-L21.
I heard theories from armchair genealogists and professional genetic wizards alike, but a theory is like an arse; we all have one. I left it at that, returning to check up on progress every year or so, for curiosities sake. This time, I got sucked into it again. You see, L-21 is called 'Celtic' because it dates to the time when these Brythonic and Gaelic languages were spoken by tribes who enjoyed Hallstatt and La Téne cultures in certain lands, especially western Europe, Britain and Ireland.
So, with this circling in my mind, I digested some history about the Brythonic Selgovae tribe who settled on the land now called Dumfries, where the Clan Maxwell later emerged! This tribe had close ties to the Brigantes, and they were both hostile toward Rome! How spectacular. My dark age obsessed detective brain is fully aware that many of my finer genealogical lists and circles have a sort of Western British/Gaelic flavour, and consequently, I started to get fleeting desires to learn Scottish Gaelic!
Before I knew what's going on, I was consudering a Celtic tattoo, admittedly, the idea of buying a kilt was sobering! It might sound wrong, because it sort of is wrong, isn't it? That FTDNA statistic information was clear; Z16502 exists in Scotland but also Ireland and England, as well as a tad in Germany and also Wales. Living in the West Midlands of England, my inner voice of sensibility says to me: "You're not a Celt, you're a twat!"
No doubt, I promise, all this pondering leaves the brain somewhat fishy. Every upturned coincidence wants to reinforce that confirmation bias you treasure, which, in all honesty; is just a dopamine hit! Many Brits today identify as Viking, we've seen the cool viking mass-media mania; Thor, The North-man, Vikings, Vinland Saga, The Last Kingdom—it's all easy viewing. Just to be more realist here, if the 1881 census records prove someones London based ancestry, they don't tend to identify as Victorian and grow 'Bob Cratchit' pork chops, do they?
Likewise, I don't think I've noticed many teenage 'Mods and Rockers' in my time or Tricorn hat wearing shoppers in town. So, I wonder, how does my little strand of so-called, 'Celtic' DNA compares with all those microplastics I've absorbed into my system after eating all that contaminated sea fish—I'm more plastic than Highlander!
These 'Celtic People' were never a genetically defined nation of 'Celts,' but put simply, they're people first. This haplogroup, L21 is a huge net that only takes Tuna. However, it is Tuna, which some fish and their historians have ascribe bygone diverse tribalism and cultural themes—still Tuna, nonetheless. However, certain historical peoples such as the Yamnaya, for example, were genetically homogeneous.
Throughout the ages, ancient Briton saw genetic and culturally diversity which shows in genealogy. Consider all those cultures: The Dal Raida, Picts, Britons, Bell Beaker People, Neolithic people, The Irish settlers across Wales. It must be said, Rome introduced YDNA from far and wide; this list comes centuries before the Anglo-Saxon, Viking and Norman period!
Genealogy has unfairly been accused of racism by the hard left or the overly Liberal, but it's merely a tool to help family historians confuse themselves. Tuna.
1. Later Generations of Christians Re-Branded Jesus. Later generations re-branded Jesus, embellishing his story, but sometimes it's contradicts the Christian message. For instance, in Matthew 15:21-28, Jesus's comparison of a gentile woman to a dog and his initial refusal to help her shows this.
2. A Trouble Maker. The bible shows Jesus as a troublemaker as he challenged Israel's rulers by publicly declaring himself as a great figure with the use of apocalyptic symbolism. Instigating disturbances in the Jerusalem Temple heightened tensions, especially as some of his followers carried weapons!
3. The Gospels Resemble Historical Fiction!Some scholars think the gospels are like what Bernard Cornwell has done with his works about Uhtred of Bebbanburg! Jesus Christ did not teach our Christianity, his followers did— scripture writers had the final word!
4. The Failed Messiah Approach. Jesus was seen as a failed messiah because he did not meet everyones expectations of the role.
5. The Biased Writing Angle. E.P. Sanders, a credible biblical scholar, believed that Jesus's arrest and execution was unexpected. He argued that Easter traditions were created retroactively by followers to explain Jesus's fate and rebuild their movement.
6. Bad news for the Jews. Many Jewish people did not benefit from the introduction of Christianity, despite being considered God's 'chosen' people. Centuries of christian-based anti-semitism in Europe caused hardships. It seems the gospel story brought them no benefit, this is not fitting the message of loving your neighbour.
7. It is an Unrealistic Story. The miraculous stories, raising the dead and healing by touch are far fetched. None of us sane minded individuals would believe to similar events today from friends, we quickly dismiss it nonsense. We never see legitimate news reports about real miracle workers, angels or demons, dragons or nephilim.
8. So Much Contradiction! There are numerous scriptural sources about Jesus: The New Testament, The Nag Hammadi Scriptures and The Apocrypha, for starters. Across the internet various sources claim that tens of thousands of denominations exist, which are all like interpretations or expressions (for want of a better description) such as Methodists, Calvinists, Mormons, or Jehovah's Witnesses. They can't all be right, but many can be wrong!
9. It's a Dodgy Deal! If Jesus rose again and walked, the divine trinity went back on its deal of the son dying for the sins of humanity, because, let's face it, death is a permanent arrangement, it is not being alive ever again! There's no consensus on the nature of the risen Jesus either, so we can't explain whether he was a ghost or a spirit, which we commonly associate with death or a physical ressurection which is the deal breaker.
10. Contraception and Sexual Ethics: In 1968, the Catholic Church released a document called 'Humanae Vitae' to continued the ban of artificial birth control such as condoms and the pill. This religious decision led to significant health problems for adherents of the faith, especially in communities afflicted with HIV/AIDS and other sexually transmitted diseases: we all know such protection greatly helps reduce the spread of illness and death.
These ten points are meant to stimulate that detective mindset. If you want to add to the list or have any thoughts, please share them in the comments section!
Not long after the Queen died, I saw a couple of posts accusing her of being a parasite. As well as this, there were quite a few art posts on Instagram portraying her in a very negative light, as well as regular memes done in bad taste—not forgetting that booing up in Scotland. It is sad this behaviour is churning out before her funeral! I'm not even a Royalist. In fact, I don't even read about them.
It's The Principle
I think one particular moral value of mine is that decent folk shouldn't spit on graves, the flavour of disdain is not palatable for me. That and usually, before we start smashing the jokes out, we wait a month or so.
What's with the Parasite thing?
Years ago, the level headed pop culturalist David Ike earnt a crust smearing the monarchy in his conspuracy books. He once said, The Queen and her bloodline were a reptilian alien. I could only think of 'V' that 80s show I used to watch imagining a young Ile blown away by the shows writer. I haven't a scooby how common it is for schizotypal conspiracy illuminates to enjoy charity fundraising. I bet the reptilian overlords family did a lot more over the last seventy years.
What Sort of Person?
If the anti-monarchy agenda label our recently departed matriarch a parasite, what will they say about the rest of us? Are recipients of benefits also parasites? If not, are they called something else like bottom feeders, maybe? Circumstance has forced sections of the public to rely on food banks, generally, opinionated narcissists like to throw their intracranial excrement at the life situations of other people just to their own validate self image—perhaps this factors into it?
The expenses scandal of the 90s revealed a 'parasitic nature' in politics which continues today. Comparably, working class families are richer than the countless starving children in those television adverts asking for donations; if £5 feeds someone and you have £5000, at what point do you choose to be a saint or an scrooge with your money? We are all shit.
Bad Politics Bad Conduct?
The age of retirement in this country is 67 for some and like my father, many are given a cheap watch, and a half-soaked speech before you clock out for the last time. Pensions and the life of retirement is fantastic for some but not all. My point being; anyone can call anyone a parasite, it's just low nonetheless. The Queen was working only two days before she died, nearly a sodding one hundred years old! Born into a life where public service was the norm, she was expected to learn the pomp and tradition, she did what was expected of her. Of course, we can't choose our family, heritage or the nationality to which we are born. We can choose how to behave.
Become a Republic?
Bringing up colonialism, as well as stealing the Jewels and treasures for her Royal adornments was another recurring dig. Let's just imagine she decided to abdicate and dissolve her monarchy and reset everything pre-monarchy just before her passing? We would see some international disinterest for a start, fiscal disadvantage and fewer international visitors.
Anti-Elizabethan sentiment is passed around the playground by left-wingers. However, dissolution of monarchy would be a large democratic motion facilitated by The Palace, White Hall and Westminster, but it isn't going to happen. It serves a purpose.
The Generation Blame
Also, with regard to historical blaming, in no form of logic can people be rightfully held accountable for the actions of relatives born years before they were: should we slam Prince Andrews daughters on trial for his antics with Guiffre and Epstein? In fact, I could be charged by the descendants of the murdered French soldiers my forefather arrowed down in the skirmishes under Edmund Mortimer in 1415.
My Conclusion
You don't have to rush in and be a troll at someone else's expense. Give it at least a month.
The Queen - Elizabeth II - Royal Death - The Queens Funeral - Show Respect
A cult is a sect perceived as different from everyday life because it is considered radical or simply wrong. In contrast, religion is integrated into society. Cult members don't lead normal lives compared to free civilians; their group identity centers around their communal lifestyle often based on theological arguments. Often, a charismatic autocratic leader may facilitate undesirable outcomes, such as dictating financial measures or imposing sexual and/or work-related demands. In extreme cases, there have been instances of mass suicide. Unsettling indeed!
There have been cult-like comparisons made with Jesus before. These seem reasonable. Why not? For instance, Jesus's followers voluntarily devoted their lives to him and willingly faced death for their beliefs. Manson's family surrendered their lives, but they committed murder for Manson. Osho's 'Red People' took up arms for Osho, and then there's the messianic aura surrounding David Koresh and the Waco disaster. Clearly, none of these cults evolved into a global religion; media scrutiny tends to reveal unhealthy sects. Hence, figures like David Koresh, Charles Manson, or Warren Jeffs are unlikely to achieve the historical renown of The Buddha or Moses in the modern era.
Some Vital Points that made Christianity grow:
1. The promise of being saved, the chance to go heaven in exchange for 'belief' which equated to service, loyalty and following the the sect leader. This was alluring for ancient superstitious communities.
2. The ease of communication across language barriers, with merchants along trade routes, converting influential individuals.
3. The written accounts of Jesus Christ came from devotees who revered him, and who wanted others to revere him.
4. Christian writings defended Christianity against opposing theological views and were disseminated globally.
5. Christian evangelism infiltrated numerous other religions and traditions by cultural appropriation: turning celtic gods into saints, attempts at christianising Roman Saturnalia, Jesus as a germanic warrior Christ.
6. The execution of Jesus was transformed into a holy symbol, a divine super martyrdom offering hope to potential converts: Preaching that God sacrificed his only son to save us all, meant that deals based on salvation continued during missionary work!
Culty Types These Days!
The cult leader Warren Jeffs (featured in the Netflix show: Keep Sweet, Pray and Obey) and the historical figure Eoshu Msheekha (known today as Jesus Christ) are separated by over two millennia. Despite the differences in myth, culture, and geographical distance, it is intriguing to see how theological modes of operation can seemingly transcend boundaries.
Charges against Jesus according to the bible:
Blasphemy: He claimed to be the Messiah and the son of God. Crucifixion was an incorrect punishment for blasphemy within the context of Jewish law. E.P. Sanders noted that two specific actions led to Jesus's arrest: his symbolic entry into Jerusalem on a donkey, fulfilling a messianic prophecy, and his expulsion of traders from the temple. The chief priests (usually the Sanhedrin) were responsible for reporting troublemakers to the Roman governor. Under Octavian's rule, Rome maintained justice and order in its territories, not leaving such matters to the locals.
Sedition against Rome (Likely): This was a crime in Roman territories and could have been the rationale for Jesus's crucifixion. However, religious crimes often fell under the remit of local religious authorities. Jesus, aware of his cousin John the Baptist's fate, would have understood the potential consequences of his actions. The Gospel of Mark portrays Pharisees as malevolently seeking Jesus's death for their own reasons. Professor Sanders suggests that the Gospels do not fully represent their historical and cultural context. In other words, they are not as villianous as portrayed and Roman Governor Pontius Pilate ordered the execution quickly.
Non-biblical sources:
Talmud, Sanhedrin, Tosefta:
These texts are considered late and not strictly historical, but none of it really is strictly historical given the theological spin! Nevertheless, they present alternative candidates as Jesus and Mary, his mother. The identification of Yeshua Ben Pantera as Jesus Christ is not widely accepted in biblical circles and mainstream theology. It wouldn't though, given the defamation within them. Admittedly, the new testament writings do not mention Pantera, which, yet again, if it would true make sense wouldn't it? The Pantera tradition is argued to be a polemical reaction to Christianity by Jewish authors. However, I would doubt it, if the earliest mentioning of this Yeshua ben Pantera tradition came from the 2nd-century Greek philosopher Celsus who was actively writing between 170–180 CE. This shows Celsus was propogating an existing Jewish narrative that is evidently much older that Talmudic text, the age of this these stories are unknown but it could have been a first century oral tradition.
Top scholars Professor Sanders and Professor Crossan say that the Romans crucified Jesus much quicker than the gospels portray. High Priest Caiaphas is seen by Sanders as being pro-active in his duty by having Jesus taken-up to justice. In doing so, he ended a potential uprising which would have saved many Jewish lives from Roman swords. Instead, it was one life for all the Jews which, fair dues, was the person who caused the trouble. Rome permitted it's provinces religious freedom and so, first century Pharisees punished their religious criminals by stoning them, not the Roman cross. Sanhedrin 43a claims that Yeshua and his five disciples were stoned to death and then hanged (crucified) on the eve of the Passover, Schäfer (2009).
Professor Tabor (2016) has shared his ideas about Pantera being a family name. In his YouTube videos, he has referenced early church leaders and fathers, Epiphanius and Origen who have used this Pantera name in connection with Jesus.Epiphanias said Mary was the daughter of Joachim Bar Panther, the son of Levi, likely surnamed Pantera! Eas the names cursed or shamed? Tabor simply highlights the plausibilty of a Pantera family existing in the first century. He has pointed to a discovery of a first century Israeli ossuary bone box, inscribed with Joseph son of Pantera. He doesn't think it is the father of Jesus.
Old non-biblical sources, such as Tacitus, note Emperor Nero's persecution of Christians—some of these accounts are quite blunt. The Talmud and Midrash do not support Jesus being oppressive to his followers, engaging in sexual misconduct, or being involved in terrorism. These later sources emphasize that both Jewish and Roman authorities collaborated in Jesus's execution as a joint punishment, aligning with the accounts of stoning and crucifixion—methods used by Rome to set an example for others.
Jesus's disciples were Jewish individuals familiar with the Torah but receptive to his eschatological teachings. It is commonly accepted Jesus believed himself to be the Messiah, descended from King David, who urged his followers to abandon everything to join him, promising a hundredfold reward in the kingdom. This talk sounds very reminiscent of a cult leader.
Verdict:
There is no compelling evidence to suggest that Jesus Christ was anything other than a leader of his own movement or sect influenced by Judaic traditions and other philosophical ideas. Cults typically do not stem from established religions, unlike cases such as Warren Jeffs and the FLDS or the Waco cult. Scriptures depict Jesus challenging the religious authorities of the established Jewish faith, preaching to them about imminent divine judgment, posturing himself as a figure of key importance, attracting thrir followers, claiming salvation came only through him! This resonates strongly. In contrast to sects, cults often demand total devotion from members. A charismatic leader, such as Jesus expected his followers to bear their burdens alongside him, forsaking their families to join his cause. He sent them into perilous situations as "lambs among wolves," a practice more akin to a cult than a sect:
"If anyone comes to me but loves his father, mother, wife, children, brothers, or sisters more than me, he cannot be my follower. Whoever will not carry the cross that is given to him when he follows me cannot be my follower." - Luke 14:25-27
"Peter began to speak to Jesus: Look, we have left everything and followed you. Jesus replied: Truly I tell you, no one who has left home or brothers or sisters or mother or father or children or fields for me and the gospel will fail to receive a hundred times as much in this present age: homes, brothers, sisters, mothers, children, and fields—along with persecutions—and in the age to come eternal life." - Mark 10:28-30
References:
Crossan, J. D. (1996). Who Killed Jesus? HarperCollins, pp. 31–38.
Sanders, E. P. (1996). The Historical Figure of Jesus. Penguin Putnam, pp. 215-238.
Schäfer, Peter. (2009). Jesus in the Talmud. Princeton University Press.
Tabor, James. (2016). TABORBLOG: The "Jesus Son of Pantera" Traditions. [Online] Available at: https://jamestabor.com/the-jesus-son-of-panthera-traditions/
Annoying Cosmological Arguments That Promote Religion: it's not quite evidence.
6 to 8 min read
Essentially, debates like the Kalam cosmological argument or the watchmaker analogy, typically place emphasis on annoying claims that play on intuition which religious and cult leaders have often utilised. For example, since Christianity arrived in Europe people started crediting God for anything good that happened in their lives and the Devil was the cause of the bad. Modern religious minded folk are doing the same to this day!
The evangelist, William Lane Craig, stressed that it's obvious how everything with a beginning, was, in fact, caused by an almighty Abrahamic god, or likewise, they attribute marvels of nature to intelligent design. It's never ending: what always follows is that God did it if it is good. Even the cosmological assertion that the universe must originate with some kind of non-material, all amazing God who existed before time itself came to be, is realistically, the same religious psychology. It ignores all religious atrocities like what they did to poor Joan of Arc.
Here are the simplified key points for cosmological arguments and my responses to them:
1 Everything that has a beginning has a cause.
This is often made to look like a no brainer because, again, it appeals to common intuition. On the contrary, a beginning, be it created or a by-product or an accident can have one, none or many causes. When you question causality, not everything that starts has any one definitive cause, because, in reality, weall anecdotally prescribe causes for everything! Rarely do we actually uptake a discipline of unbiased study to identify specific, individual causes for everything that happens. Causes even evade modern professional disciplines, for example, when experts talk about the start of cancer development, explaining the numerous contributing carcinogenic factors, causes get lost in the mess of multiple possibility. It's similar with unstable random biological mutation, because there's rarely no one clear cause when an organism might evolve or devolve.
For the sake of this point, let's say apparitions are spirits that manifest from nothing; we humans aren't exploiting any trigger devices to conjure them up, it's purely supernatural phenomenon. We can call apparitions random, but also deem them to be personal experiences, much like many mystic interactions with God from across the globe. Denying the existence of apparitions weakens the argument for a religious apparition such as the Holy Spirit, angels, Christ or God, which, is a discredits pro-creator cosmological argument. On the other hand, keeping within the scope of this context; the acceptance of manifesting apparitions acknowledge that not all things with a beginning have a discernible cause—the paranormal phenomena would hold mysterious causality. These debates become tiresome.
We can question what might cause things to begin all day, starting with acute onset schizophrenia or other drastic human personality changes—they often lack a cause. In fairness, we shouldn't, but we do prescribe causes without proof. By asserting 'everything that has a beginning has a cause,' do we discard other 'numerous contributing causal factors' involving change within any system, state or form? Consider the complex alterations of form seen in the double slit experiment during measurement/observation of waves, for example. The cause of flattening waves are not fully known. There is nothing obvious about causality in this example, despite William Lane Craig's use of the word to appeal to popular intuition concerning his view on causation. These arguments can be too 'dodgy car salesman' and not enough unbiased progression.
2 The universe has a beginning
Again, we don't know. An agnostic position is honest here. Scientists don't all agree if or how the universe began. The period called the big bang is a blank period. It wasn't even a bang because sound doesn't travel in space! The universe might not have a beginning. Much of the universe is unknown and ideas of multiverse are holding sway. It is as if the judge has declared the universe has a 'beginning,' without even picking up the case file.
3 The universe has a cause
Again no one knows and so this claim cannot be measured or validated by the world's best scientists. If time began with the 'big bang'–which is popular in physics–then time didn't exist before the big bang, this means the universe had no creator. Without time there is no creating, hence planning and building time. Consciousness exists in time. Even if we say the universe was caused we cannot prove it. At this moment the universe has no discernible cause.
4 The cause of the universe is God.
Straight to the religious conclusion already? Which God? There are many of them, Brahma, Odin or Jupiter, perhaps? God, just like fairies, flying unicorns or werewolves, has never been proven to exist, this is why people with religion can be dismissive of natural and scientific explanations that do not follow their faiths narrative. As previously touched on, Gods are arguably corporeal, spiritual and without mass, like how Socrates described our imagination before he died. It seems ludicrous how a matter-less ghost is supposed to have created our universe from his primordial stasis.
When we read a book such as Mary Shelley's Frankenstein we will conjure up various images of Victor Frankenstein, even though the classic black and white film used a mad scientist archetype, which is not in the novel at all.
There's nothing wrong with borrowing this popular movie icon to visualise Shelley's words. Victor Frankenstein, (like many fictional literary characters) have to form into your concept of what they might be; we take on the job of visualising or bringing characters to life through interpretation—this is where the work of the author ends and where we begin.
The cartoonist and illustrator does exactly the same with character creation or the composition of visual comedy. Symbols, pop culture, stereotypes, tropes and memes are all tools. We all saw the caricatures of Trump that saturated Instagram, especially the tantruming child or cry baby? This man has been symbolised, mocked and postured more than most political figures I can think of, to be honest.
It's the various combinations or ways of depiction, the construal and style are way more important than the subject. Countless techniques are within you, waiting: you can break the conceptual art perimeters. I love how cartoonists unapologetically make piss taking and fuckwittery an art.
At the start of my drawing processes, there is always a haze, that blurry raw idea, the gist of what I want to say. If I wanted to make a visual joke about MPs who plan to cut disability benefits for vulnerable people, I'd immediately start by exploring imagery based on common stereotypes. The demonisation conveyed in the art taints the targets actions—sadly some internet platforms ban you for it!
Before Anthony Hopkins immortalised Hannibal Lecter back in the nineties, people read about him first. His presence and appearance was upto the reader. He was multifaceted in his written form (he had crimson brown eyes and extra fingers in the book).
Realistic cartoons take longer to do, and they can detract from the mood or the joke itself! Maybe this is why Calvin and Hobbes aren't decorated with ultra realistic facial features. Well designed bur simple creations let your imagination do a little work.
Finger Tapping a Few Ideas on my Grubby Keyboard...
7 to 9 min read
Films, Books, T.V Boxed sets, have so many transitional archetypes, such as the bibles fall of Lucifer, along with the spiritual transformation of the disciples, there's the U-turn of Saul to Paul, who was temporarily blinded by the divine light of the alleged resurrected Christ. They all share something in common with us.
Themes of Change
Transition is a common theme with so many compelling characters. Look at Bruce Banner/Hulk or Bruce Wayne, the Batman.
Other examples are Beauty and the Beast, or the story of Anakin Skywalker who transformed into Darth Vader. None of us Brit's are a stranger to Doctor Who, the regenerating time lord. As you can plainly see there are innumerable stories with character transformation!
Mythology and lore across Europe has cool shape-shifting pagan gods along with werewolves and vampires! Further east the account of the Buddha's awakening is venerated. We could compile a huge list as long as the country.
Today the internet VSBattle Tiers rate characters on strength and ability. Fans create plausible fictional battles, for example, the cartoon version of Thundercats can be pitted against the Michael Bay Transformers movie. The magic is how fans meticulously follow the fiction, as well as how the fiction drives them to do so!
The Mental and Psychological
However, transformation, the complete alteration of a person in the mundane world we live in, doesn't usually involve super powers, gods or aliens, but onset mental illness can feel just as dramatic. Sudden mental illness can be one of the most life changing experiences an individual might undergo. Anxiety disorders, diagnoses of mood or thought and other conditions of the mind, can re-write someone's world.
Films such as A Beautiful Mind, help depict our struggles with Mental illness fairly. It follows Professor John Nash of Princeton university who had a significant diagnosis. Another interesting example is the 2002 film, The Hours, starring Meryl Streep and Nicole Kidman. It portrays the lives of three people from different times, in various parts of the world, all of whom are connected by Virginia Woolf's fictional novel, Mrs Dalloway. We see key historical moments of Virginia Woolf's transition into illness, while she tries to write the book that impacts on the other characters. It is chaos theory, showing the interconnection between fact and fiction; overlapping time and distance.
The Power of Influence
When creative teams from within the arts use story arcs, archetypes and play on scenarios wisely, it can result with direct change in the real world.
No matter what torments us, learning to be self-reflective and able to recognise our own unhelpful beliefs or ideas, is good for personal growth. Valuable stories help this happen. They shape who we are no matter where you live: Wild Bill Hickok, Wyatt Earp were legends of the Old West who inspired cowboys!
I'd like to think that most of us have our journey-like processes; not unlike those transformational archetypes we see in fiction. Actors study and imitate people in hope of nailing that Oscar winning performance; likewise, on the other end of the spectrum, when we feel deflated, we tend to watch them to feel better. Empathic creatures we are; our brains are packed with mirror neurons and as individuals we might borrow another person's idiosyncrasy, buzz phrase, mannerisms or jokes. It's fair to suggest single guys have tried the Eugene Fitzherbert smoulder from Disney's Tangled. Maybe Disney took inspiration from them?
Adopted mannerisms that hold charm or sexual appeal may well be recycled. However, these behaviours will more than likely furnish us with a temporary sense of self, the sort we look back on with embarrassment. As a kid I modelled myself on Rambo. I tried invoking his accent as well, to become just like the war hero, but the head master asked my mum if I'd acquired a head injury!
Han Solo types are imperfect personalities or the 'lovable rogue' or an 'anti-hero,' a non-conforming rebel, with a flawed character. Ignorant of norms and appealing to the empathy (and sometimes the envy) of the viewers. Growing up in the eighties, it was clear how many boys wanted to be Han Solo or Indiana Jones. It wasn't just me who wanted to be like my hero.
Alan Watts, the spiritual teacher said: 'Our normal sensation of self is a hoax, or, at best, a temporary role that we are playing with our own tacit consent, just as every hypnotised person is willing to be hypnotised. The most strongly enforced of all taboos is the taboo against knowing who or what you really are behind the mask of your apparently separate, independent, and isolated ego.'
Watts illustrates how 'the feeling of' who we are, in itself, is self-deceptive. Through time, who we believe we are, morphs into something else; I certainly don't want to wear a red headband and kill soldiers for the US anymore! Self-perception is malleable. This is just our outer superficial self, and we pay it lots of attention. Unnecessarily, certain people work outside of contracted hours for free, because of their corporate identities. Concerning themselves with business matters of chief executives and upper management who earn way above their pay grade. A cage of one's own making. This is redefining yourself as person who is simply not you, it's unhealthy and goes against your nature.
As we see with Arthur Fleck/Joker the anti-hero, but also a victim of societal injustice. In reality, here in the UK, the unfair distribution of wealth is also a daily torment; tired, numbing psychiatric treatment that Fleck righteously perseveres with, earns him the audience's sympathy. Our mental health care is awful, viewers can resonate with this film. The transforming factors of Fleck/Joker rests on his limited life chances and the harsh existence, which the corrupt city provides. Thomas Wayne is the face of the super-rich and surrounded by politicians, businessmen, and subordinates, who unapologetically, live extravagantly well in the presence of poverty.
Wayne thinks nothing of speaking out against the underprivileged on television. In the DC comic books, the philosophy of the Joker, in essence, explores how it only takes one truly bad day to become like him, a super villain. In the 2019 movie, Joker, Fleck experiences something akin to this process—like many people today. This anti-hero is the largest grossing movie; is this because the Joker resonates with our modern world? I believe so.
Ebenezer's Breakdown: A Spiritual Awakening?
The redemption ofEbenezer Scrooge. A lonely, isolated, miserable, penny-pincher who undergoes an awakening and begins to live with compassion. The Charles Dickens novella: A Christmas Carol, was carefully written. Described as hard and sharp as flint, we see Scrooge follow a karmic arc of change, a 'we reap what we sow' moral. The name Ebenezer Scrooge was chosen wisely because of what it signifies. It's a Hebrew place name meaning 'help-stone,' a monumental type stone of religious significance.
In the book of Samuel, Eben-Ezer is a location where the Israelites fought the Philistines. It's as if Charles Dickens was seeking out a name that showed conflict; battles were fought at the religious help-stone, the duality of Ebenezer's nature is sealed in his name. Powerfully deep or coincidence? In Old English, the word Scrooge means 'to squeeze'. This is exactly what he did through the story. He denied his employee, Bob Cratchit time off for Christmas and paid the man very meagre wages, giving no festive bonus for his poor family. However, this conflicted help-stone, the sharp, hard flint of a man, did not start out this way.
We know he is visited by what Dickens described as ghosts. If we peel back these dramatic embellishments of the misers experience, we're left with something different entirely. A lonely, isolated and stubborn old man, who lost friendships and family. Haunted by his mistakes and regrets, but too proud to accept them. He was experiencing a real identity crisis in relation to his community and his mortality but wrapped up in Christmas paper.
From the solitude of his house, he hears the city celebrating outside and denies the sentiment, bah humbug! Apart from his wealth, biased recollection is his only comfort. Scrooge is not the person he thinks he is, but instead, a self-justified persona based on his own poor reasoning. The three ghosts are polished and fanciful in the Novella and T.V productions for entertainment purposes, but; on a more realistic note, what Dickens described here is a man re-discovering who he really is, salvaging life!
This is the human condition at its finest. This is reality and fantasy holding hands. Truth and fantasy explaining the same mystical awakening many experience across the globe daily.
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
